-
- Veeam Legend
- Posts: 851
- Liked: 180 times
- Joined: Jul 19, 2016 8:39 am
- Full Name: Michael
- Location: Rheintal, Austria
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
Just wannted to add my idea to this thread. I will not call a web client a good or bad idea because I think the result matters but it is for sure something that is expected by many people.
The thing with every web client is for sure that you have a extra installation of a webserver (could also be on the veeam-server) and some other dependcies and services which could crash or be unavailable (for whatever reason) and then you won't be able to do your management things (most of the time then when you need it most). Compared to a offline-client (or console) it can be less reliable.
Somewhere in this thread there was the example of the social medias alias facebook, twitter, etc. and they all show what HTML can do and how stable it can be but of course they have a lot of people and ressources to keep it running 24/7/365.
And here comes something that has not been mentioned before (or probably I didn't get it): Why not keeping the web client completely on veeam-side (management, maintenance, availability)? So what do I mean? I'm thinking about a hosted solution where I would log in to the HTML client just like when I do the log in to the veeam customer portal. My backup server has an outbound connection established to the hosted veeam-servers and all the calls from the GUI are being sent to my backup server in my datacenters.
I would not have to think about the availability/maintenance of the web interface and would still be able to use this interface without VPN if I'm out of the office. Of course, you would always need an active internet connection, that's clear.
What do others think about it?
The thing with every web client is for sure that you have a extra installation of a webserver (could also be on the veeam-server) and some other dependcies and services which could crash or be unavailable (for whatever reason) and then you won't be able to do your management things (most of the time then when you need it most). Compared to a offline-client (or console) it can be less reliable.
Somewhere in this thread there was the example of the social medias alias facebook, twitter, etc. and they all show what HTML can do and how stable it can be but of course they have a lot of people and ressources to keep it running 24/7/365.
And here comes something that has not been mentioned before (or probably I didn't get it): Why not keeping the web client completely on veeam-side (management, maintenance, availability)? So what do I mean? I'm thinking about a hosted solution where I would log in to the HTML client just like when I do the log in to the veeam customer portal. My backup server has an outbound connection established to the hosted veeam-servers and all the calls from the GUI are being sent to my backup server in my datacenters.
I would not have to think about the availability/maintenance of the web interface and would still be able to use this interface without VPN if I'm out of the office. Of course, you would always need an active internet connection, that's clear.
What do others think about it?
-
- Veeam Vanguard
- Posts: 629
- Liked: 251 times
- Joined: Sep 27, 2011 12:17 pm
- Full Name: Craig Dalrymple
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
I'll add a little more to the discussion. Microsoft recently announced 'Project Honolulu' which is a very lightweight management tool for Windows servers (https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/ask ... er-part-1/). This app effectively uses Remote powershell and WMI to pull back the data, and supports extensions. So obvious question would be, is this something Veeam are interested in developing, to allow management of VBR servers?
-
- Product Manager
- Posts: 5636
- Liked: 1181 times
- Joined: Jul 15, 2013 11:09 am
- Full Name: Niels Engelen
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
Quite sure somebody can write something for it
Personal blog: https://foonet.be
GitHub: https://github.com/nielsengelen
GitHub: https://github.com/nielsengelen
-
- Expert
- Posts: 245
- Liked: 14 times
- Joined: Jul 25, 2018 4:12 pm
- Full Name: Poweruser
- Contact:
[MERGED] Feature Suggestion: Web Interface (Small VAC)
A small Availability Console...
just a Web-Interface which allows the same as B&R Console allows.
Then you can manage your backup from everywhere without installing the software console.
also you can check backups over (terrible) mobile devices every kind.
actually you have to use remotedesktop, vnc or install the console executables.
anyway it would be easier to provide a portable console. not much development as you can reuse the actual console but admins can start them just from a share! (like portable apps)
just a Web-Interface which allows the same as B&R Console allows.
Then you can manage your backup from everywhere without installing the software console.
also you can check backups over (terrible) mobile devices every kind.
actually you have to use remotedesktop, vnc or install the console executables.
anyway it would be easier to provide a portable console. not much development as you can reuse the actual console but admins can start them just from a share! (like portable apps)
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 7328
- Liked: 781 times
- Joined: May 21, 2014 11:03 am
- Full Name: Nikita Shestakov
- Location: Prague
- Contact:
-
- Expert
- Posts: 245
- Liked: 14 times
- Joined: Jul 25, 2018 4:12 pm
- Full Name: Poweruser
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
ah there is :-)
this looks fine except big iis ;-)
i have to try this.
i hope i can install it onto another host which does not run the backup server. i will have to check.
this looks fine except big iis ;-)
i have to try this.
i hope i can install it onto another host which does not run the backup server. i will have to check.
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31561
- Liked: 6725 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
Yes, you certainly can do this.
-
- Novice
- Posts: 6
- Liked: never
- Joined: May 17, 2021 3:27 pm
- Full Name: Mathias Schultz
- Contact:
[MERGED] Feature Request - Veeam WebGui
Hey Forum,
i would like to have a WebGUI for Veeam other than Veeam Enterprise Manager (Job Creation is a Pain in the ***)
The Console of Veeam is great and it Works, but i don't want to install Software on every Computer/Server which needs to look into the Backup.
I just want to type https://MyBackupServer.Domain.local and have a login with MFA.
Greetings
Mathias
i would like to have a WebGUI for Veeam other than Veeam Enterprise Manager (Job Creation is a Pain in the ***)
The Console of Veeam is great and it Works, but i don't want to install Software on every Computer/Server which needs to look into the Backup.
I just want to type https://MyBackupServer.Domain.local and have a login with MFA.
Greetings
Mathias
-
- Product Manager
- Posts: 14322
- Liked: 2890 times
- Joined: Sep 01, 2014 11:46 am
- Full Name: Hannes Kasparick
- Location: Austria
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
Hello,
I added your request to one of the existing threads that ask for the same and count your feature request +1
Best regards,
Hannes
I added your request to one of the existing threads that ask for the same and count your feature request +1
Best regards,
Hannes
-
- Veeam Legend
- Posts: 290
- Liked: 128 times
- Joined: Apr 11, 2023 1:18 pm
- Full Name: Tyler Jurgens
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
As painful as a transition from the Veeam B&R console to an HTML console would be, I would applaud that change. Take Veeam from being Windows only install and move it to a linux based environment, either through containers or a linux (VM) appliance.
I say this full well knowing I'll probably curse any HTML client when they first come out (anyone who lived through the vSphere 5 -> 7 transition knows full well what I mean). It would be really great to have more flexibility installing Veeam without needing to worry about Windows licensing.
I say this full well knowing I'll probably curse any HTML client when they first come out (anyone who lived through the vSphere 5 -> 7 transition knows full well what I mean). It would be really great to have more flexibility installing Veeam without needing to worry about Windows licensing.
Tyler Jurgens
Veeam Legend x2 | vExpert ** | VMCE | VCP 2020 | Tanzu Vanguard | VUG Canada Leader | VMUG Calgary Leader
Blog: https://explosive.cloud
Twitter: @Tyler_Jurgens BlueSky: @tylerjurgens.bsky.social
Veeam Legend x2 | vExpert ** | VMCE | VCP 2020 | Tanzu Vanguard | VUG Canada Leader | VMUG Calgary Leader
Blog: https://explosive.cloud
Twitter: @Tyler_Jurgens BlueSky: @tylerjurgens.bsky.social
-
- Novice
- Posts: 4
- Liked: never
- Joined: Sep 17, 2021 9:05 am
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
+1 from my side!
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 398
- Liked: 57 times
- Joined: Apr 29, 2022 2:41 pm
- Full Name: Tim
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
I'll +1 this, mostly because working with multiple different apps to manage Veeam environments is a pain and leads to confusion trying to explain to new users how to manage everything. I'd like to see a single interface for all functionality. Right now it seems a lot like there's different teams at Veeam making their own different products with very little effort to make one universal Veeam platform.
I'd also be good with actually being able to manage VBR jobs from the VSPC server. That's definitely the main thing I'd like to be able to do.
Though some extra monitoring capabilities would also be nice as right now we use some custom dashboards with Grafana, but admittedly most of that is monitoring the infrastructure at a system level, memory usage, cpu usage, drive usage, things that aren't necessarily part of Veeam. So I won't be too picky about Veeam providing all that information.
And I am totally for an HTML and Javascript based interface. I know most of the complaints about web interfaces are a bit old in the thread, but from my perspective it really doesn't matter what the app is made in. Could be a .NET app for all I care. Just so long as it works well and provides all the functionality in one place. I don't think that there's any reason to assume that something would be low quality solely because it runs in a web browser. From my perspective a web app is just simpler from a development perspective because, provided the dev team only utilizes capabilities available across major browsers, there's really only one version of the interface, plus a small-screen-optimized version for phones and tablets. That said I will say the biggest mistake you could make is to have the "mobile" version not have all the same functionality as the "desktop" version. I would rather have clunky access to the "desktop" version on the go, than have easy access to a "mobile" version that doesn't actually do what I need.
I'd also be good with actually being able to manage VBR jobs from the VSPC server. That's definitely the main thing I'd like to be able to do.
Though some extra monitoring capabilities would also be nice as right now we use some custom dashboards with Grafana, but admittedly most of that is monitoring the infrastructure at a system level, memory usage, cpu usage, drive usage, things that aren't necessarily part of Veeam. So I won't be too picky about Veeam providing all that information.
And I am totally for an HTML and Javascript based interface. I know most of the complaints about web interfaces are a bit old in the thread, but from my perspective it really doesn't matter what the app is made in. Could be a .NET app for all I care. Just so long as it works well and provides all the functionality in one place. I don't think that there's any reason to assume that something would be low quality solely because it runs in a web browser. From my perspective a web app is just simpler from a development perspective because, provided the dev team only utilizes capabilities available across major browsers, there's really only one version of the interface, plus a small-screen-optimized version for phones and tablets. That said I will say the biggest mistake you could make is to have the "mobile" version not have all the same functionality as the "desktop" version. I would rather have clunky access to the "desktop" version on the go, than have easy access to a "mobile" version that doesn't actually do what I need.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 261
- Liked: 66 times
- Joined: Mar 16, 2015 4:00 pm
- Full Name: David Rubin
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
Although I am not against a web portal replacing the existing VBR console, I have to say that I have never seen an HTML5 portal that has truly replicated the functionality and performance of a "fat" console (and I include the vSphere HTML5 portal in that). I would rather see a web portal that includes the major functionalities of all the Veeam products (rather than separate portals for BEM, VSPC, O365, etc) and leave the full clients intact for the people doing the actual administration
To be perfectly honest, I already have concerns about this becoming an issue as, apparently, the only way to download a license from the VCSP portal is by using Chrome; per Veeam Support, using Firefox or Edge is not supported for the VCSP portal and there are no plans to fix the portal.provided the dev team only utilizes capabilities available across major browsers
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 398
- Liked: 57 times
- Joined: Apr 29, 2022 2:41 pm
- Full Name: Tim
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
While that sort of limitation does bother me to see, modern Edge is literally based on Chromium, just like Chrome is. I've literally never seen anywhere that Chrome works and Edge doesn't. I don't really use Firefox so I can't speak much to that. So typically I've always used Edge everywhere with no issues.
That said, regarding your first point there about truly replicating all the functionality. I'd say that comes down to Veeam's dev team, or whatever company makes the interface for whatever product. It's not so much that the web app can't have all the functionality as the .NET app and is a bad idea as a result. If that were the case I'd agree with you on that point. In my experience though it's more like, whatever company's dev team just didn't bother to replicate all the functionality in the web app version, which may in some cases simply be that the .NET app and the web app are developed by two separate teams with two separate amounts of experience and two separate development plans and timelines. So in my opinion it really does all come back to making sure that if there is such a web app, which I think would be beneficial, the web app needs to be developed with all the same functionality. Needs to. Not "people want this so we'll look at doing it eventually if the web app seems popular" but "needs to be done early on, if not in the first general release, else we might as well not do it at all".
That said, no opposition to keeping the .NET app around, but since in either case the Console is basically a remote management tool, and doesn't really do much processing or any resource intensive tasks locally where it runs, I would think there's no technical limitation that would prevent the web app from being a thing. Though there may be some limitations around local file system access if it's running in a web browser.
That said, regarding your first point there about truly replicating all the functionality. I'd say that comes down to Veeam's dev team, or whatever company makes the interface for whatever product. It's not so much that the web app can't have all the functionality as the .NET app and is a bad idea as a result. If that were the case I'd agree with you on that point. In my experience though it's more like, whatever company's dev team just didn't bother to replicate all the functionality in the web app version, which may in some cases simply be that the .NET app and the web app are developed by two separate teams with two separate amounts of experience and two separate development plans and timelines. So in my opinion it really does all come back to making sure that if there is such a web app, which I think would be beneficial, the web app needs to be developed with all the same functionality. Needs to. Not "people want this so we'll look at doing it eventually if the web app seems popular" but "needs to be done early on, if not in the first general release, else we might as well not do it at all".
That said, no opposition to keeping the .NET app around, but since in either case the Console is basically a remote management tool, and doesn't really do much processing or any resource intensive tasks locally where it runs, I would think there's no technical limitation that would prevent the web app from being a thing. Though there may be some limitations around local file system access if it's running in a web browser.
-
- Chief Product Officer
- Posts: 31561
- Liked: 6725 times
- Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
- Location: Baar, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
While this is an off-topic for this thread, please PM me the case ID where Veeam Support stated this, because devs disagree with their statement entirely. As mentioned already by Tim, both Chrome and Edge are built on the same Chromium engine, so based on this alone this statement doesn't make much sense. Further, QA has just smoke-tested VCSP with the latest Edge and did NOT observe any issues. And finally, all three browsers are explicitly listed as supported in the official System Requirements.RubinCompServ wrote: ↑Jun 22, 2023 6:23 pmTo be perfectly honest, I already have concerns about this becoming an issue as, apparently, the only way to download a license from the VCSP portal is by using Chrome; per Veeam Support, using Firefox or Edge is not supported for the VCSP portal and there are no plans to fix the portal.
-
- Service Provider
- Posts: 261
- Liked: 66 times
- Joined: Mar 16, 2015 4:00 pm
- Full Name: David Rubin
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
On this, we agree. You often only get one chance at convincing someone to move to a new UI, and the moment you say, "You need to use the old interface to perform [x task], they're going to go back to the old interface and stay there.BackupBytesTim wrote: ↑Jun 23, 2023 2:11 pm ...the web app needs to be developed with all the same functionality. Needs to. Not "people want this so we'll look at doing it eventually if the web app seems popular" but "needs to be done early on, if not in the first general release, else we might as well not do it at all".
-
- Novice
- Posts: 6
- Liked: 2 times
- Joined: Mar 17, 2023 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Feature Request : Web Console
I'll just say that, looking to the future, a unified HTML client (as in, managing all the various products in one pane) has to be the way forward, painful as it will likely be. So I support working towards this.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 150 guests